attributes through the lens of accreditationand professional body. Thirdly, it discusses students’ complex problem-solving processthough modeling activities by undertaking a problem-based project. Foremost among the challenges for the 21st Century engineering education, set forth byNational Academy of Engineering, is to meet current and future demands for engineering skillsand knowledge related to the nation’s economy and society: the development of technologyinnovation to drive national competitiveness, long-term economic growth, solve societalchange and quality of life [1]. Therefore, the success of rapid globally interconnectedtechnological innovation depends on social, cultural, political, and economic factors. Forexample, solution of
scientific fields, how metaphors help scientists process abstract information,or how metaphors can translate scientific research for the public. Moreover, this studyemphasizes the need for writing and communication classes that target multiple audiences as anintegral part of any graduate-level engineering curriculum.1. Introduction In the groundbreaking 1980 book Metaphors We Live By, Lakoff and Johnson explain that ratherthan simply serving as a poetic device, metaphor structures “how we perceive, how we think, andwhat we do” every day [1, p. 4]. In the decades since their book was first published, cognitivelinguists have researched how we express conceptual metaphors linguistically [2]-[5], proposeddifferent mechanisms for how we mentally process
our communities, orthe structure of our political and economic systems — tend to have the least influence on thosedecisions and how they are made. Design justice rethinks design processes, centers people whoare normally marginalized by design, and uses collaborative, creative practices to address thedeepest challenges our communities face.” [1]. Two core tenets of the Design Justice movementare that “absolutely anyone can participate meaningfully in design,” and “those who are directlyaffected by the issues a project aims to address must be at the center of the design process.” [4]Engineering education community and design researchers generally agree that pedagogicalinnovations are needed to ensure that current and future technologies are
, transformational change1. IntroductionInstitutions offering engineering programs often implement generalized change strategies, butthese strategies tend to have little impact on institutional culture. Since the late 1980s, Tierneyhas argued that institutions with similar missions and curricula can have different outcomesbased on how their identities are communicated to internal and external constituents and theperceptions held by these groups [1]. The results of such changes, however, may be confined to aspecific area of the institution, or the institutional environment may not be responsive to thechanges implemented [2]. Faculty and administrators must implement intentional and continuouschange strategies to address complex institutional challenges [3
-ethics, Undergraduate EducationIntroductionEngineers are fundamentally problem solvers. Sometimes engineering solutions come withethical implications, this is what engineering ethics courses aim to help students betterunderstand. Ethics education for engineers takes many different forms across a wide variety ofinstitutions. As Hess and Fore attest, “... there is neither a consensus throughout the engineeringeducation community regarding which strategies are most effective towards which ends, norwhich ends are most important.”1 Believing that student self-awareness and the capacity toidentify and effectively communicate their own values is an “end” worth pursuing, we created anengineering ethics course for that purpose. The newly adopted
list of e-learning platforms that applied RS for personalized learning. The main findingsrevealed that the deep learning method was effective in big data analysis due to its ability toforecast students’ achievements, behaviors, and future paths. Therefore, we considered thatdeep learning could be widely applied as a technique to develop recommender systems tosupport personalized learning environments. Furthermore, because we found that only a fewstudies have investigated the implementation of this AI technology, researchers will have agreat opportunity to explore deep learning to develop more innovative solutions ineducational fields.Keywords: Deep learning, Recommender systems, Personalized learning environments,Artificial intelligence.1
components, and with effort regulation. The practical and theoretical implications ofthis study are also discussed.IntroductionSelf-assessment can foster self-reflection and develop a more self-regulated approach to thestudents learning process. Being able to reflect and evaluate oneself is vital to becomingsuccessful in college. While some students are overconfident, others are underconfident abouttheir academic ability and strengths [1]. Overconfident students are usually confounded wheninstructors’ assessment of their academic task did not meet up with their expectations. Since oneof the critical goals of higher education is to instill in college students the ability to beintrospective and be able to evaluate their progress relative to their
multiple sections and the development of various iterations.IntroductionIntegrating experiential learning into the undergraduate engineering curriculum is a key factor inimproving learning outcomes, retention, and academic performance for all students [1], [2]. InEngineering Design Graphics, opportunities exist to integrate experiential learning, howevermany schools, particularly community colleges, are limited by a lack of lab space dedicated forthis purpose. While students are still able to carry out a design project and benefit from many ofthe learning outcomes desired, the limitations of space and time remain. An open accessmakerspace enables broader learning outcomes to be achieved including hands-on experiencewith tools and equipment used
Technologies at the Computer Sciences Department in the Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica de Chile (UC). She entered university throught Talent and Inclusion Program. She is interested in STEM education, equal opportunities in STEM education (gender and social disparities) and engineering design related to computer sciences. She has worked as a researcher at the DILAB UC (Engineering Design Initiative) in Chile where she has also worked as a Teaching Assistant in Design Lab Studio (2019-1, 2, 2020-1), and Technology, Entrepreneurship and Design (2021).Delaney RyanDr. Scott A. PattisonSmirla Ramos-Montanez ˜Viviana L´opez BurgosSabrina De Los Santos Rodr´ıguezMaria D. QuijanoAmy R Corbett ©American
share a visionthat aims to foster the growth of inclusive STEM future faculty, further details on the vision ofthe collaboratives can be found in our previous publications [1],[2].The Texas RC collaboratives recognize that graduate students are at an ideal career stage todesign their professional pathways based on their positionality, especially for junior/ communitycolleges and regional universities. An emphasis on the versatility of graduate degrees allowsstudents to explore their professional development to become inclusive STEM future faculty [3].This recognition results from newfound interest among graduate students in future academiccareers [NSF, 2021]. Along with the versatility of degrees opening industry and researchpositions for
, journalism, etc., do not communicate, although theywill need to work together in the future to create viable new paths forward. A hurdle tocurriculum change is that faculty have not been trained in sustainability concepts and typicallydo not teach across colleges. They are also unsure of how to address DEI, not wanting to get itwrong and cause harm as they experiment in the classroom. Some programs have therefore takena “train the trainer” approach, holding faculty workshops [1, 2]. The effectiveness of suchworkshops is not altogether clear; for example, instructors’ confidence in identifying effectiveways to include sustainability into their courses may not increase. We focused squarely onequipping faculty by providing demos and boosting
engineeringeducation, more research should be done to collect and interpret students' stories to betterhighlight the engineering student experience.Keywords: narrative inquiry, systematic review, undergraduate1.0 IntroductionEngineering education research tends to prefer quantitative methods due to training engineeringresearchers to use a post-positivist perspective and advanced mathematical and technical skills[1-2]. In Borrego, Douglas, & Amelink's [1] methods sourcebook specific to engineeringeducation, they claim that quantitative research should be limited to outcomes that aregeneralizable to a larger subset of the population. In contrast, qualitative research shouldexplore questions that cannot be answered without "rich, contextual descriptions of
author of 10 patents and multiple publications/presentations at technical and engineering education conferences. Areas of expertise and research interest include, Deformation & Failure Mechanisms, Materials Science, Fracture Mechanics, Process-Structure-Property Relationships, Finite Element Stress Analysis Modeling & Failure Analysis, ASME BPV Code Sec VIII Div. 1 & 2, API 579/ASME FFS-1 Code, Materials Testing and Engineering Education. Professionally registered engineer in the State of Texas (PE).Matt Pharr, Texas A&M University Matt Pharr is an Associate Professor and J. Mike Walker ’66 Faculty Fellow in Mechanical Engineering at Texas A&M University with a courtesy appointment in Materials
made a shift from a field primarily focused ondeveloping engineering curriculum to considering identity and experience as core aspects ofeducation [1]–[3]. Much of this work has focused on engineering identity, or professionalidentity, formation and highlighting the interplay between individual identity and engineeringculture [4]–[6]. While work in engineering identity has become a prominent area of engineeringeducation research, it can also be somewhat narrow. Implicitly, studies in engineering identitytend to position students’ formation of an engineering identity as a positive outcome thatpromotes retention in the field [7]–[9] and students’ lack of engineering identity formation as aproblem to solve. Instead, the formation of student
infrastructure for teaching a “remote” or “personal” [1] laboratory course. This solution not only provided the students with equitable infrastructure for doing all the required projects and hands-on experiments remotely but also could be used as a learning opportunity to provide students with more insight into the setup, design, functionality, and purpose of lab equipment. While in typical academic years and in the normal (in-person) mode of operation, the sophomore students in this course learned to use the laboratory equipment for doing projects and lab experiments, in this remote course students additionally learned how these equipment are designed and built through building one – the test-board – as one of their first projects. This
last several decades, there are an increasing number of programs designed toengage preschool-age children and their families in engineering design [1], [2]. Creating learningopportunities for children at an early age is critical for supporting long-term engineering-relatedinterest development and career pathways [3], [4]. Out-of-school, family-based engineeringexperiences can be powerful catalysts supporting young children’s engagement with engineeringdesign practices and the development of engineering-related interests and identities [5]–[8].These experiences can also have an important influence on parents, including their motivation tocreate new engineering-related learning opportunities for their children and the ways theysupport children’s
an adaptation of the "Additive innovation" model developed by ArizonaState University in their RED (Revolutionalizing Engineering Departments) project [1] and isfunded by a National Science Foundation (NSF) IUSE/PFE: Revolutionizing Engineering andComputer Science Departments (IUSE/PFE: RED) grant.There is widespread consensus that the engineering curricula need to evolve to meet theexponentially fast changes that are occurring to industry needs. The American Society ofMechanical Engineers Vision 2030 [2] articulates the needs and challenges well. However, thereis also clear evidence that many of the standard approaches to implementing these changes donot actually achieve the desired results, as documented by the analytical review of
perception atthe end of the semester. We also analyze the lab data, comparing success metrics and timelines ofsubmissions between the two semesters. Several labs experienced a statistically significantincrease in correct, first submissions under the point-restricted policy. We use these results to leaddiscussion about our experience using a point-restricted policy for larger programmingassignments.1 IntroductionThe cost of poor software quality is calculated to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars 1 . Thequality of software relies on the quality of skills programmers possess. In other words, to succeedas programmers, students need to develop high-quality code 2 . To produce this code, studentsmust learn how to rigorously test, bug track, and
worked as a lecturer for two years at the University of Lahore, Pakistan. Additionally, he has been associated with the software industry in various capacities, from developer to consultant. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Native and Immigrant students: An Analysis of Wellbeing using PISA 2018IntroductionThe United States of America currently hosts the largest immigrant population in the world withalmost 46.6 million people who were not born in the country [1]. Moreover, the immigrantpopulation in the USA is also very diverse with people belonging to almost all countries of theworld. In recent years due to the global political climate and regional conflicts in many parts ofthe world
Paper ID #38624First-Year Students in Experiential Learning in Engineering Education:A Systematic Literature ReviewDr. Gerald Tembrevilla, Mount Saint Vincent University Gerald Tembrevilla obtained his PhD in science (physics) education at the University of British Columbia. He served as a postdoctoral fellow in the Faculty of Engineering at McMaster University. Currently, he is an Assistant Professor at Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax, Canada and teaching and doing research on 1.) the integration of learning technologies to improve hands-on science, scientific argumentation skills, and 2.) examining the
area and not general or introductory engineering. These, among otherfactors, make designing an effective introduction to engineering courses challenging. Landis [1]recommends five course objectives for introduction to engineering courses: community building,professional development, academic development, personal development and orientation.Design projects apply to many of these. In community building, the team aspects of numerousprojects help students develop professional skills and build a support network for their collegeexperience. Teaching the engineering design process and engineering’s role in a better society isexcellent professional development. Productive interactions with peers and faculty, as well aslearning to prioritize important
classrooms have become a common teaching choice. For example, a recent articleidentified more than 1900 publications on flipped or inverted classes [1]. Various flippedapproaches and materials are used, with the goal of improving pedagogy by offloading certainlearning tasks to times outside the classroom, allowing more effective use of face-to-face time.Bishop and Verleger [2] describe the rise and origins of the flipped classroom, and they define itas “a new pedagogical method, which employs asynchronous video lectures and practiceproblems as homework, and active, group-based problem-solving activities in the classroom.”Additionally, they describe the student-centered learning theories that motivate a flippedenvironment. Flipped classes tend
is formallythe proposed solution is viable. [1]. When organizations do defined as “a development approach in which thenot conduct a comprehensive needs analysis and subsequently requirements are subject to a high level of uncertainty andembrace good requirements management practices, it will volatility and are likely to change throughout the project [5].”impact their ability to perform project work effectively and Note that this term is commonly known as agile; we prefer ansuccessfully deliver products [1]. According to PMIs report, adaptive approach for many reasons, including the fact that theRequirements Management: A core competency for Project
style course has been well documented [1-4]. Further,the COVID-19 pandemic showed that lectures delivered remotely in a synchronous environment can be aseffective as holding live lectures in a classroom [5]. The virtual environment also proved to manyinstructors that recording lectures was simple, opening up the possibility that students could access theinformation at a time that was convenient for them.Engineering has started to move away from lecture only courses to offer courses that include activelearning strategies. Active learning requires the students to become directly involved in the learningprocess instead of sitting as passive learners. The benefits and use of active learning in the classroom havebeen recognized in many different
benefitted from pictural design problems, as well.IntroductionEngineering education is a dynamic field influenced by the industry's shifting demands. TheAmerican Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Vision 2030 Project (V2030) has identifiedseveral goals that are crucial for the preparedness of future engineers. One goal is to enhance"Student design/build project experiences in the degree program" [1]. However, this goalchallenges educators as they strive to implement it effectively.Implementing the goal poses a challenge for educators as it leaves many decisions to be made,which should only be done with consideration for the students. One crucial factor to consider isthe academic major of the students. As demonstrated by Vieira, the regions of
contributed to their professional and personal development. Thedesign of the REM program—to be both inspirational and inclusive for the population of studentswho apply to be a part of CISTAR’s REM program—has been described at length already in anearlier paper [1]. Important to reiterate here, however, is that the 6-week program is specificallydesigned as a first-research experience (approximately 70% of our participants). Further, the REMstudent participants over the last two years have reflected our applicant pool as follows: an estimated80% Black/African American, 10% Hispanic/Latinx, 10% White, 50% female; and one‐third of thestudents are first-generation college. Thus, the students belong to several groups that areunderrepresented in STEM fields
issues of risk mitigation into account, and they should be quantified to the extent possible and stated in such a way that one can tell if a given design meets them. (HS-ETS1-1) Evaluate a solution to a complex real-world problem, based on scientific knowledge, student-generated sources of evidence, prioritized criteria, and tradeoff considerations. (HS-ETS1-3) New technologies can have deep impacts on society and the environment, including some that were not anticipated. Analysis of costs and benefits is a critical aspect of decisions about technology. (HS-ETS1-3) The uses of technologies and any limitations on their use are driven by individual or societal needs, desires, and values; by the findings of scientific research; and
in USdollars for 2023. The number of IoT connected devices is growing at an annual rate of 20%/yearwith billions of devices connected. Accordingly, there is much need for foundational IoTengineering courses in our educational institutions to prepare engineers for this technology sector.The challenge for course developers is that IoT technical foundations are exceedingly broad -ranging from smart sensors to low power computing to cloud infrastructure. Most universitiesfocus on one or two aspects of IoT technical foundations, specifically those associated with thecomputing aspects of IoT. We have developed a novel approach for an IoT course by segmentingthe course into three fundamental technology areas. These areas are respectively (1
this group, we have found that there is much variation in thesupport, guidance, and promotion pathways depending on their individual institutions anddepartments. The purpose of this paper is to explore these differences and provide examples ofpolicies and procedures at a number of institutions to be used as a potential model.This paper has two specific objectives: (1) Discuss the results of a survey given to the faculty inthis group. This survey asks questions about the length of their service and contract, their titleand opportunities for promotion, support given to them for professional development, theirjourney to take a teaching-track position and the level of support they feel in their departments;and (2) Provide examples of teaching
Faculty Identity Development through the Tenure and Promotion Process as Black and Hispanic Engineering Faculty **This is a Work-In-Progress**Introduction With the presence of about 1.5 million faculty members as of 2020 (NCES, 2022) yetcontinued underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic faculty, it is important to understand whymarginalization persists. This is especially the case at selective higher education institutions likeR1 (Research 1) universities, particularly in science and math departments (Li & Koedel, 2017).When looking deeper at departments of engineering for example, we often find limited to noBlack and Hispanic engineering faculty (BHEF) members (Nelson & Brammer, 2010). Whilethere